Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to Figure 6: High-priority lane for the procurement of personal protective equipment, Data on sources on page 28 of the National Audit Office report entitled Investigation into government procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic, HC 959, published 26 November 2020, what the categories were of the three leads from other identified sources that did not fall into the categories identified in Figure 6.
Answered by Alex Burghart - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
There are active legal proceedings at the moment in relation to this matter and, as such, it would not be appropriate to comment while these are ongoing.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what peer-reviewed evidence UK Health Security Agency holds on the effectiveness of wearing face masks in public for the prevention of transmission of covid-19.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) and one of its predecessor organisations, Public Health England, undertook and published multiple rapid evidence reviews on the effectiveness of face coverings in community settings for the prevention of transmission of COVID-19. The first review of the effectiveness of face coverings masks in non-healthcare settings was published on 26 June 2020, with the first updated published on 29 January 2021, followed by a second update on 9 November 2021.
The second update included 25 studies, two randomised controlled trials and 23 observational studies. Although the quality of the evidence was low/medium, it predominantly suggested that face coverings help to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in the community, through source control, wearer protection and universal masking. 14 of the 25 studies identified were peer-reviewed, nine were preprints and two were non-peer-reviewed reports. All studies were assessed by an experienced UKHSA evidence reviewer and checked by a second reviewer using the quality criteria checklist.
Due to the pace of the UKHSA COVID-19 pandemic response, independent peer review was not sought prior to publication but all evidence reviews have been subject to an internal quality assurance and formal clearance process prior to publication. All UKHSA publications contain information regarding evidence quality and review processes included for each subject reviewed.
Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment the Government has made of the value for money of personal protective equipment procured under covid-19 emergency regulations.
Answered by Neil O'Brien
Government Internal Audit Agency analysed prices paid for individual products across the personal protective equipment (PPE) supply chain including 12 contracts in detail and found that there was a proportionate control environment in place that balanced the need to urgently obtain PPE at scale and pace, with the need to secure value for money.
As well as due diligence checks there was systematic price benchmarking. Prices were evaluated against the need for the product, the quantity available, the specification of the product and how quickly it could be delivered. Many deals were rejected or renegotiated as initial prices offered were not acceptable.
Asked by: Karin Smyth (Labour - Bristol South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment the Government has made of the value for money of personal protective equipment procured under covid-19 emergency regulations.
Answered by Neil O'Brien
Government Internal Audit Agency analysed prices paid for individual products across the personal protective equipment (PPE) supply chain including 12 contracts in detail and found that there was a proportionate control environment in place that balanced the need to urgently obtain PPE at scale and pace, with the need to secure value for money.
As well as due diligence checks there was systematic price benchmarking. Prices were evaluated against the need for the product, the quantity available, the specification of the product and how quickly it could be delivered. Many deals were rejected or renegotiated as initial prices offered were not acceptable.
Asked by: Sam Tarry (Labour - Ilford South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will publish the names of (a) Ministers (b) Members of Parliament and (c) Officials who referred firms onto expedited route for supplying personal protective equipment.
Answered by Will Quince
Details of the High Priority Lane were published on 17 November 2021. This list was updated on the 11 February 2022 and is available at the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ppe-procurement-in-the-early-pandemic
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government how much Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) they currently have in stock in preparation for a further surge of COVID-19; and whether they will list the main suppliers for the current stock.
Answered by Lord Markham - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As of September 2022, the Department holds 9.4 billion items of personal protective equipment (PPE), which could be used in response to a further wave of COVID-19. The Department has committed to providing PPE for free until the end of March 2023 and holds sufficient stocks to meet projected demand across all categories.
We are unable to provide the information requested on the suppliers for current stocks. When a product is quality assured and joins the supply chain, its source is not recorded.
Asked by: Angela Rayner (Labour - Ashton-under-Lyne)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with which other Departments her Department has had discussions on the storage of PPE since 1 January 2022.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
Since January 2022, the Department has held discussions on the storage of personal protective equipment with the Cabinet Office, HM Treasury and the Ministry of Defence.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they will take in response to the increasing number of COVID-19 cases; and what plans they have (1) to re-introduce free testing, and (2) to update their advice on the wearing of face masks.
Answered by Lord Kamall
The COVID-19 vaccination and booster programme and the availability of antiviral treatments has ensured a reduced risk of severe illness or hospitalisation. We have transitioned the response towards guidance and encouraging responsible behaviours, while targeting protection towards those individuals most at risk from the virus. Testing remains available for eligible groups, including for certain high-risk individuals and settings.
It is currently recommended that face coverings should be worn when COVID-19 rates are high, in crowded and enclosed spaces and when coming into close contact with individuals at high risk. While there are currently no plans to update the guidance on wearing face coverings, the Government continues to assess the situation and will take further action if required to ensure the response remains effective and proportionate.
Asked by: Rupa Huq (Labour - Ealing Central and Acton)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what proportion of unusable personal protective equipment acquired by his Department during the covid-19 pandemic was acquired via the High Priority Lane.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Approximately 3% of personal protective equipment ordered by the Department is considered unusable. Of this, 13% was provided by suppliers processed through the High Priority Lane.
Asked by: Navendu Mishra (Labour - Stockport)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether an assessment has been made of the adequacy of the availability of personal protective equipment for BAME healthcare workers during the (a) first and (b) second wave of the covid-19 outbreak.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Since October 2020, the Department has received feedback on personal protective equipment (PPE) from users through regular customer engagement panels. Staff groups with protected characteristics, including those from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, have reported their experiences of the use and availability of PPE. Earlier in the pandemic, some BAME staff reported difficulty with the fit of some items of PPE. The Department has addressed these concerns through appropriate fit testing and by supplying a range of sizes to cater to a diverse range of users.